BASEBALL TALK: Yanks-Mariners Round 2 and WS Home Field

[Zeno]

Tuesday starts the second round Yanks-Mariners.

Game 1 Pettitte/Moyer
Game 2 Mussina/Pinerio
Game 3 Wells/Garcia

Edgar's still on a roll batting 363 and an OPS of 1.055.
Bret Boone is in the swing also and having a great year so far, after 31 games batting 294, 21 RBI, 7 hr, 18 BB and an OPS of .933. And John Olerud is right behind. Now if Mike Cameron can just start to hit better.

For Yanks - Mussina and Wells have yet to lose. And Rivera is back.

My prediction: Mariners win game 1 and 3. Yanks take game 2. Just on a whim really.

Now about this change in the Home field for the World Series. The League that wins the All-Star Game has home field in the WS. What do all the Baseball Fans here think of this? A two-year test run initially.

Comments? See below also………..


Copied below is part of an Associated Press Article:

NEW YORK -- Baseball players agreed to a two-year experiment Thursday to give home-field advantage in the World Series to the league that wins the All-Star Game.


"It's always been fun," said Cleveland designated hitter Ellis Burks, a two-time All-Star. "But now, especially with guys from contending teams, it's really going to be fun. They're going to have a lot more to play for."


Owners approved the proposal Jan. 17, and players had been discussing it since before agreeing to it on a trial basis. Despite the approval, some players are against the new idea.


"I disagree with it, completely and totally," said Los Angeles pitcher Kevin Brown a five-time All-Star. "I think it just takes away from the whole idea of what the All-Star game is about, which is letting the fans vote and letting it be an exhibition game. Now they're trying to make it into something that it never has been."


Since the start of the World Series in 1903, home-field advantage has alternated between the American and National leagues. Commissioner Bud Selig proposed the change after last year's All-Star Game in Milwaukee ended in a 7-7, 11-inning tie when both leagues ran out of pitchers.

[HDPM]

Dangerous thing about the All Star Game deciding home field. The mgr. - assuming he is managing a contender - has the incentive to use pitchers from rivals in his league for too long. Put innings on their arm and win the game. Both help his club. Maybe it would be so obvious that they won't do it etc.... But in relief or whatever, it would be easy to justify going with a guy an inning longer or something. Other players may go longer in the game too. That's not as bad. Can you imagine Ted Williams having a chance to hit a game winning home run in the 9th today? Nope, he'd be out by the 4th or whatever.

[andyfox]

"Commissioner Bud Selig proposed the change after last year's All-Star Game in Milwaukee ended in a 7-7, 11-inning tie when both leagues ran out of pitchers."

I thought the game was called because both leagues ran out of steroids.

[Josh W]

The real problem with the allstar game is the fans. The game is an exhibition. There doesn't need to be a winner.

Look, I dislike Bud Selig A LOT. I really do. But he made the right decision last year. What else could he do, given the scenario?

But the fans were outraged so something HAD to be done, or so was said.

Now, I hate the yankees even more than Bud Selig. But I have oodles of respect for Joe Torre. As a Mariners fan, I was worried last year when Freddy Garcia was the last pitcher, and Torre would have no choice but to use him. However, Torre appreciated the idea of ending the game.

Now, if the fans wouldn't have had the outrage, this never woulda been a problem.

Josh

[IrishHand]

Put innings on their arm and win the game. Both help his club.

This is a pretty weak argument. How many innings do you think you're talking about here? 3? 4? The guy generally has 8+ pitchers and an unspoken obligation to use all except maybe one being kept in reserve for extra innings (generally a younger, 1st-time all star).Nevermind the fact we're talking about starters who average ~7 innings per start and will pitch upwards of 200 innings in the year. Joe Torre isn't going to gain a competitive advantage by 'making' Pedro pitch 3 or 4 innings in an All-Star game. First of all, those extra 1-2 innings might be the ones to get the AL, and therefore possibly the Red Sox, home-field advantage in the WS. Would the Sox manager agree to that? I'd be blown away if he didn't. The higher emphasis on winning helps all (competitive) AL teams. Also, I've yet to hear of a baseball player who didn't want to be in the game. Again, ask every player at the All-Star game how much of the game they'd like to play, and I suspect most - pitchers included - would say the whole thing and mean it.

The All-Star game is a professional baseball game. The players are well-compensated and well-rewarded for their efforts. Adding just the slightest amount of validity and meaning to the game is a great thing. I'm a very serious baseball fan, and I gave up watching the thing about a dozen years ago simply because the thing was becoming a mockery of a real game - as last year perfectly demonstrated.

Now if only they'd do away with that lame rule requiring representation from all teams...

[andyfox]

I don't think the decision Selig made was the problem (Torre and Brenley should be blamed, if blame need be placed); it was the way he did it, that excruciatingly long conference in public view while the players waited to see what would happen. And then Garcia saying he would have pitched a few more innings. Once Rivera and Smoltz came out of the game you knew there was going to be a problem.

Leave it to Selig to fix things up. Look what a great job he did with the Brewers.